GREEK INSCRIPTIONS
(PLATES XXXVII-XL)
N THE following pages, seven Attic inscriptions, including one unpublished Epi- graphical Museum fragment, are presented. Two ephebe-lists (Nos. 91 and 92) provide new prosopographical information. No. 90 is a dedication made by the prytaneis of an unknown phyle in 327/6 B.C. Portions of the prescripts of three decrees (Nos. 93, 94, and 95) relate to the chronological problems of the first half of the second century B.C. Finally, No. 96 is a fragment of a prytany decree.
90 (Plate XXXVII). Two joining fragments of a base of Hymettian marble. The left fragment was found on April 29, 1936, in Section KK; the right on February 12, 1937, in Section AA. The back and sides are broken away. The original surfaces are picked smooth and have drafted edges.
Height, 0.082 m.; width (as joined), 0.30 m.; thickness, 0.15 m. Height of letters, 0.015 m.
Inv. No. I 4081.
a. 327/6
[---
-]
o s-pVTc1' a -vLK [vKcwrEo --E-] [----] ET &H'y-qovog apXo [vrog ---]For similar dedicatory monuments, see I.G., 12, 2833; Hesperica, X, 1941, p. 40; and Hesperica, XVI, 1947, no. 42. The earliest preserved decree in honor of prytaneis was passed in this same archonship of Hegemon. Akamantis was the phyle praised (no. 1 in S. Dow's Prytacteis). The ekklesia, however, might praise several pry- tanizing phylai within one year; so prytaneis other than those of Akamantis may have been judged victorious in 327/6.1
91 (Plate XXXVIII). Upper right corner of a stele of Hymettian marble, preserving the top and smooth-dressed right side, removed from a Byzantine wall in Section X on May 16, 1938. The elaborate mouldings extend along the top and right side.
Height, 0.259m.; width, 0.225 m.; thickness, 0.171 m. Height of letters, 0.007 m.
Inv. No. I 5456.
'For VuKraVeS, see J. Kirchner ad I.G., 112, 1742.
American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve, and extend access to Hesperia
fin. s. IV a. non-Trotx.
[
demoticum ] v Olvatot- - -]vorvJ Avoaviag Avoi-'7TITo(v)
?__ ?KXEAO (vs) 10 OFEO7EL'TCV JE0OTt[qO](V)
?-- ---VG&wO ( S) EV1KXEit8S EVaKXEOV ( S)
5 ? - - -DtXtoa-i3Art81q TO MEVEJEo
?__ -?XEo(Vg) Mapa00'tot
?_--w ---tGtV ( OS) -rPaTtoS llvOtkvoS
15 Tqi0L6EOS TqJLOKXELt' ( OV)
[. .. K] pITOS V)XA@V0 ( S)
The monuments possessing physical characteristics which most clearly resemble those of our new fragment are the epheboi inscriptions of Leontis, published as 'ApX. 'E+., 1918, p. 75, and of Oineis, to be published soon in Hesperia, Supplement VIII. The former, as in our inscription, lacked any distinctive heading referring to the epheboi.
No similar Aiantid ephebe-list of this period is preserved.2 Oinoe, the smallest of the six demes of Aiantis, here has four representatives. The man named in line 14 may have been a brother of Pythippos, son of Pythion, of Marathon, who was chair- man of the proedroi in 306/5.3 Two other members of the deme Marathon who were named Timotheos (line 15) are known from fourth-century inscriptions.4 Another man from this same period is known who had the same nomen and patronymic as our Timotheos, but a different demotic.5 I have not discovered the name MEVEfE4 (line 12) in Attic prosopography. The name is not found in W. Pape, Warterbuch der gr. Eigennamen3, or in F. Bechtel, Die historischen Persolennanten des Griechischen. MEVE4boXobo is found at Eretria.
92 (Plate XXXVIII). Two joining fragments of Hymettian marble, each found in the wall of modern houses in Section X. The lower fragment was found on February 6, 1937; the upper on February 23, 1937.
Height (as joined), 0.43 m.; width, 0.22 m.; thickness, 0.162 m. Height of letters, (line 1) 0.12 m.; (lines 2 ff.) 0.005 m.
Inv. No. 4495.
2 This observation takes into account the doubtful examples of epheboi inscriptions given by
A. W. Gomme, The Population of Athens in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B. C. (Oxford, 1933), pp. 69-70.
I. G., 12, 471. For later Mapa0wvtot bearing the name VllvOov, see J. Sundwall, Nachtrdge, p. 147. 4P.A., 13709, 13710.
186 W. KENDRICK PRITCHETT
c. a. 235
vacat 0.07 m.
o0t e'y/3o-V [acrEs e --- - apXovT0o]
Ii---]
KaAA t[ 'a . co)vog
[ 'E]PEX6E[Z83]0os
5 'AvrT8copos E [vi]& jrov E[vptEv'e] 'AXKErT7' [At]ovvirtov K[m0Lo-LEv's]
AiyeZaos
[ALoKX] X[ s] A Upo]pov 'EpXt [Ev'] [ .. .. ]eos t7tr7rov--
10 Ev10VKp6Tr-q Ei6vctduXo [v 'AXatEvs,]
llav8tovti4o
AEAd'4aLcL 'Apo-ropaXo [v---] ...a.Jvq j[s] ALOKXEOV [s---] KadXA [L]V70[s] As [(L] 0sov[--]
15 A [Ev]rt[8o]s
[. . 13.
['AKaua] yr [ Sos]
Stoichedon order was observed in the greater portion of the register of names, although in the patronymic of line 13 three letters occupy four letter-spaces. Traces on the squeeze would permit the reading of IIX [wOEvs] for the demotic in line 9, but the markings are too indistinct to be introduced into the text.
The number of epheboi representing each phyle is very small. The drop in enrol- ment, as compared with the fourth century, is in conformity with the evidence of other third century epheboi inscriptions.6 One of the two Macedonian phylai was not represented. This omission may be paralleled by the lack of any epheboi for Antiochis in 244/3 7 and for Oineis and Aiantis in 220/19.8
A date ca. 235 B.c. for this fragment is suggested on the basis of two prosopo-
graphical items. A Dromeas of Erchia, who was contributor to the defense of the city in 247/6,9 had a son who was ephebos in 237/6.10 This Dromeas might well be
6 See I.G., II2, 665 (269/8); 700 + Hesperia, VII, 1938, pp. 110-112 (258/7); 681 (249/8) ; 766 (244/3); 787 (237/6); and Hesperia, XV, 1946, p. 192 (220/19). The dates of inscriptions here cited are those given by W. K. Pritchett and B. D. Meritt, The Chronology of Hellenistic Athens (Cambridge, 1940).
7 I.G., II2, 766.
8 Hesperia, XV, 1946, p. 192. 9 Hesperia, XI, 1942, p. 290, line 36.
10 I.G., II2, 787, line 23. The stemma of this important Erchian family with numerous members
the same as the father of the ephebos of line 8." Secondly, the E'OVKKp'Tr-q E1OvI6XOV A yd8og (line 10), on the basis of reverse name and of identity of phyle, might be
the son of EV'Ov,6aXog EvtOvKparov of that part of the deme Halai which belonged to Aigeis. The latter was a member of the boule in 256/5.12
For a possible Alketes of Kephisia (line 6), reference may be made to Kirchner's suggested correction in the funerary inscription of unknown date published as I.G., 12, 6429. Numerous K-qbto-tE bearing the name Dionysios are known.13
93 (Plate XXXVIII). Fragment, discovered in the Epigraphical Museum by Sterling Dow who transmitted a squeeze to the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. Etugene Vanderpool kindly supplied a photograph. The stone now bears the E. M. number 454.
Height of letters, 0.005 mn. Four lines occupy a vertical space of 0.05 m.
init. s. II. ca. 39
['Ert _ca. I- apx]ovTog E'T 't Ar---;A 8E;]- [karn 7rpvTaVELca] Vt Xaptvos g4&JKp [ ca. 12 ]
[Eypa vEaTEVE :]Ktpo)00pUctWoV O7/8[0EL /IE7L ElKacLa&]
[8EV;Epat Kact ELK] OO7TE [Z] T3- "pvr [avEta* EKKXcTa]
[Ev rcot 0EaTpWot 1E7aE]ra[XO / ] 6J-ca EiK [llEtpaE'0 s--]
Of known secretaries only [-a-14] Kpa'Lrov I-aXt1 487s] of 195/4 and [ Kpa6,JOV
'IJt--rtca';r of 176/5 15 may be suggested as possibly the same as the man named in
line 2. The names of many secretaries of this period, however, are not known. The calendar formula has been restored by equating Skirophorion 23 with Prytany XII 22, for the lacuna at the beginning of line 4 requires the maximum number of letters. Line 5 has been restored according to I.G., 112, 977, lines 3-4.16
The first letter of the name of the prytanizing tribe (line 1) may be read as alpha or lambda: the alphas of this script were inscribed without a crossbar.
" Although Erchia was apparently the most populous of the demes of Aigeis (A. W. Gonmllle, Population of Athens, p. 57), the name Dromeas was not common. If the name [AtoKX] [S], which
is restored on the basis of stoichedon order and the frequency, of this name within the family, is correct for the nomen in line 8 of our fragment, the nomen of Diokles' assumed brother in I.G., II2, 787, line 23, might be changed from [AtoKiX] to [ApopEag].
12 2IG., II2, 678, line 27 (== Prytaineis, no. 10).
13 See P.A., 4189-4191; I.G., II2, 1757, lines 12 and 16; 6409; and 6447; Hesperia, XV, 1946, p. 210.
14 See W. K. Pritchett and B. D. Meritt, Chronology of Hellenistic Ath-ens, p. 111. For a
Socrates of Semachidai, councillor of Antiochis in 169/8, see S. Dow, Prytaneis, no. 71, line 80.
15 See Pritchett and Meritt, op. cit., p. 120.
16 For the legal authorization for the change of meeting place, see W. A. McDonald, Political
188 W. KENDRICK PRITCHETT
94 (Plate XXXIX). Fragment of Hymettian marble, preserving the top right corner of a pedimental stele, found on May 20, 1937, in Section OA.
Height, 0.125 m.; width, 0.14 m.; thickness, 0.07 m. Height of letters, 0.005 m. Inv. No. I 4900.
Two lines occupy a vertical space of 0.02 m.
a. 177/6 ca. 36
['EIt_ -8- a3pXovTo9 E 7 9 'A] KapavT2og r
[ErapTrrs (?) irpvTavEtcag, qt - --]S lHyly,ropog 01- [vai~os eypa/iarEVvev * -7--)] OST[Er] pa6 [4.. .1]
[? ]
This fragment preserves part of the name of a hitherto unknown secretary who on the basis of considerations of script and prosopography may be assigned to the year 177/6 B.C. The writing is of a type prevalent within the period between 185 and 155 B.C.,17 which might be characterized as tachygraphic, because the effect of the
omission of horizontal hastas from the alphas and epsilons, as well as the use of short dashes for omicrons and the loops of rhos and betas, was to produce speed in writing. The father of our secretary is identified as Hegetor son of Aristoboulos of Oinoe who was treasurer of the prytaneis of Ptolemais in 192/1 B.c.'8 and was listed as treasurer of the boule in the inscription published as Prytaneis, no. 48 (199-188
B.C.). This identification, which assigns our new secretary to Oinoe A and the phyle
Ptolemais (V), seems preferable to the assumption that there was another Hegetor who belonged to that half of the subdivided deme Oinoe which was a part of the phyle Attalis (XII).
The archon Speusippos with the secretary from Phlya (V), displaced from 177/6 B..C,'9 may now be assigned to 149/8 B.C., or to that year within the period between 157 and 145 for which the phyle Ptolemais provided the secretary. The archonship of the year 165/4 B.C., which also required a secretary from Ptolemais,
is securely filled by Pelops. The chief evidence for the date of Speusippos is the style of lettering in the one inscription, Prytaneis, no. 65, wherein his name appears. It has already been noted that the letters of this inscription are not by the same hand as I.G., II12, 904, as Dow stated in the original publication.20 Indeed, Prytaneis, no. 65 exhibits a type of lettering which was particularly common in the middle of the second century B.C.21 The lettering is characterized by a sigma the bottom stroke of which
17 See W. K. Pritchett and B. D. Meritt, Chronology, p. 123.
18 Prytaneis, no. 49 plus W. K. Pritchett and B. D. Meritt, op. cit., pp. 114-115.
19 See W. B. Dinsmoor, Athenian Archon List, pp. 23 and 188; and W. K. Pritchett and B. D. Meritt, op. cit., p. xxviii.
20 See W. K. Pritchett and B. D. Meritt, op. cit., p. 117.
begins mid-way of the third hasta, by an epsilon with a vertical hasta which extends above and below the horizontal strokes, by a tau with a horizontal stroke which extends more to the left than to the right of the upright, by an omega in the form of a horse- shoe without feet the left portion of which is frequently lower than the right, by a pi with the horizontal hasta extending beyond the perpendicular strokes, by a fully- formed mu having the four hastas resting on the line, and by a phi which roughly resembles a crossbow. The alphas are sometimes open at the top and exhibit a slightly curving horizontal hasta.22 This style of lettering is more legible than the distinctive scripts of the preceding fifty years; indeed, many of the letter-forms are characteristic of styles exhibited in the latter part of the fourth century, although there is no effort to imitate stoichedon order.
There is also prosopographical evidence for the redating of Speusippos which rests, however, only on the identity of nomitia. Meritt, in publishing a new fragment of I.G., II2 700,23 noted that the Speusippos of Azenia who was ephebos in 258/7 had a grandson Speusippos who is named, presumably as a young man, in the text of an inscription from the year 183/2 B.C.24 Dow, commenting on the rarity of the name, posited that Speusippos was of the Azenian family, but suggested that the archon was an elder, homonymous relative of the young man named in I.G., 12, 2332.25 With the year of his archonship removed to 149/8 B.C., it is not necessary to assume an additional Speusippos.
The assignment of Speusippos to the period between 157 and 145 reopens the question of the date of the archonship of Apollodoros with a secretary from the phyle Oineis. Apollodoros had been assigned by Pritchett and Meritt to the year 139/8 B.C.,26 but the publication in 1941 of a new inscription by Kyparissis and Peek pro- vided evidence that Diokles was rather the eponymous official in this year.27 In the year 138/7 (archon: Timarchos) an orgeonic decree was passed in honor of an epimeletes who was in office during the archonship of Diokles. Although this decree was not passed until Thargelion, the eleventh Attic month, the natural interpretation is that the two archons held office in direct succession.
948, 953, 960, 961, 962, 968, 981, 987, 988, 1236, 1325, 1326, 1937, 1939, 1940, and 2323, lines 205 ff.; Prytaneis, nos. 52 and 74; Hesperia, V, 1936, no. 15, IX, 1940, no. 26, and XI, 1942, no. 58. Specimens are exhibited in J. Kirchner's Imagines Inscriptioium Atticarum (Berlin, 1935), nos. 102 and 104. These inscriptions are dated for the most part within the period between 170 and 135 B.C.,
but the earliest example occurs at the beginning of the century and the latest ca. 120 B.c. Dating by style of writing alone can never be very precise, but the epigraphist must attempt to identify distinctive styles of lettering which may be used for the determination of approximate dates. As in the case of the present significant style, one must be prepared to extend any terminal dates.
22 This script has been discussed by A. Wilhelm (Urk. dram. Auff., pp. 64-65) in connection with the fourth hand of I.G., II2, 2323. The first entry by this hand in the didascaliae was made in 169/8.
23 Hesperia, VII, 1938, pp. 110-114.
24 I.G.. II2, 2332, line 15.
25 Prytaneis, p. 125.
26 Op. cit., p. xxxi.
190 W. KENDRICK PRITCHETT
On the basis of this new evidence, Daux and Meritt have simultaneously pub- lished articles which offer new dates for the archon Apollodoros, and it is noteworthy that the proposed dates are separated by 48 years. Meritt proposes 151/0, which in turn requires a new tabulation for the tribal arrangement of secretaries within the period 157-145 B.c.28 Daux, who explained that he lacked photograph or squeeze, suggests 199/8 for Apollodoros, and for the date of I.G., IJ2, 978, which would then be displaced from this year, he offers 139/8, the archonship of Diokles.29 This reassignment creates a real difficulty, because the chairman of the proedroi in this decree appears as undersecretary of the boule and demos in Prytaneis, no. 47, and as secretary in Prytaneis, no. 48, both of which inscriptions are dated in the first part of the second century.
There are only two items of evidence for the archon Apollodoros who is named in I.G., II2, 973 (Plate XXXIX): the script and the secretary. The script, which exhibits small apices, is characterized by alphas with straight crossbars, omegas which are very open at the bottom, and mus and sigmas without parallel end strokes. More important, the letters are widely spaced and the order is almost stoichedon. For example, in lines 3-6 inclusive, perfect stoichedon order is observed through the thirteenth letter-space. These characteristics suggest a date near, rather than far removed from, 200 B.C. Kirchner dated the inscription after the middle of the second century B.C., because he noted the use of eta without iota in line 5.3? But mute iota was elsewhere written as adscript in this text; so this one example may be an omission on the part of the stonecutter.
The secretary in the archonship of Apollodoros was from the deme Oe of the phyle Oineis (IX in the period of thirteen phylae before 201/0 B.C. VII after 200 B.C.). When Daux and Meritt came to examine the possibilities within the range of the second-century secretaries from Oineis, they were confronted with the fact that present tables did not permit this additional secretary and that revisions, which it is unnecessary to reexamine further, would be required. However, Daux favored the year 199/8, and, if we continue our investigation to include the closing years of the third century, it becomes a striking coincidence that in the year 204/3, for which a secretary from Oineis is required, the name of the archon is already known as Apollo- doros. It seems reasonable to posit that, when two archons in the same period bear identical names and each requires a secretary from the same tribe, these two be identi- fied unless some evidence is presented in favor of their separation. If we assign I.G., I12,973 to the year 204/3 B.C., the character of this year must then be indicated as
intercalary, thus avoiding the succession of three ordinary years in present tables.
28 A;J.P., LXVIII, 1947, pp. 195-198.
29 Hesperia, XVI, 1947, pp. 55-57.
The name of the secretary in I.G., 112, 973 is preserved as[ Vc1o 'OS OEV. The
length of the name can be determined within one letter-space, because, as we have noted, the letters were inscribed in almost stoichedon order. To the year of Apollo- doros has also been assigned I.G., 1I2, 845,'1 in which the partially preserved name of the secretary has been read as follows:[. ] Ep0+ [_a. ]paoj---]. This name occurs
in the last preserved line of the stone. The letters pao- appear very clearly, and they could be part of a patronymic 3p6acovoo. However, for a control of the surface of the stone where the letters EpOr were read, a photograph is offered in Plate XL. Although the inscription has been edited by many scholars including Pittakys, Koehler, Kirchner, and Wilhelm, this writer is unable to confirm the readings of any of these three letters. What traces remain on the photograph suggest an eta of the word in which case the Snomen of the secretary would be of approximately the same length as the nomen in I.G., JJ2, 973. If however, the three letters exist on the stone, I.G.,
JJ2, 845 may be assigned to some other year within the period 212-205 B.C.,32 wherein the names of at least two archons (209/8 and 207/6) are not known.
95 (Plate XXXIX). Fragment of Hymettian marble found in the wall of a house in Section il on October 21, 1937. It preserves the pedimental top with left akroterion, the back, and the left side.
Height, 0.16 m.; width, 0.155 m.; thickness, 0.156 m. Height of letters, 0.006 m. Inv. No. I 3804 b.
a. 173/2 ca. 50-53
'Etrt 'AXeAdv [8pov a'pXovros EM Tq a19 - ---pVTavE]a -
ca] s ')F A V`7OK [_ _ _ 22_--(EypaaTEVEV-* ca6 fV7OS]
rV sv a[, 7^1, ,rvaEa , , a ^
EEVq7) Kaj vEa[, -TPVTcWEVLS EKKX?)O-a -- W]
[ irpo8p ]cixv L[ElInikL;Ev?- - -]
The archon Alexandros has been tentatively dated in 173/2 B.C. in accord with
the evidence presented in Hesperia, X, 1941, p. 280, for which year a secretary from the phyle Hippothontis is required. This inscription gives for the first time part of the nomen of the secretary which may be completed as AV1"'OKXEi8t', AV1"OKX J',
AV'roKpalr-g, or Av`roKpa6rp, all attested in Attic prosopography. Noteworthy is the indentation of the text to a distance of 0.03 m. from the left edge of the stone.
96 (Plate XXXIX). Fragment of Pentelic marble, broken on all sides, found on March 17, 1936, in a modern fill in Section KK. The marble has a greenish vein.
31 For the most recent text, see W. K. Pritchett and B. D. Meritt, op. cit., pp. 104-108. The name of the archon is restored as ['E7ri 'AtroAXoaU]pov.
192 W. KENDRICK PRITCIIETT
Height, 0.145 m.; width, 0.082 m.; thickness, 0.09 m. Height of letters, 0.007 Il. Inv. No. I 3785.
c. med. s. II ca. 51
[E8OeEV T7COt 8&7/TLL] vacat [--- --- ---?EVTrEV tWrEp] c$v brayyE[XXovow]
[ot 71TpVTaWEV3 IT? --- nrEp TCWV 0VOU0V (OlV] E'OVOV 7-a' 7T[pa 'rv]
[EKKX'q0crl'0V rCOt TE 'A7r6XA)Wvt rTW Hpoo-raTrcqptWf Kac] rE 'AprE4uL [8t E]
5 [BovXat'at Ka'L rdE coofx0panC KaL rovg a'XXotLg 0EOZ oTs 7ra']rptov 'v [dya0et]
[rVXEi 8E8OXOca 7Can 8riyu)t 7a iE'v a 0aOd 8EXEOOat r] a yEOV [60-a EV]
[roZs tEpoZs oTs ('Otvov
e4'
iJyLEiU KaLF ~TCOfl)T7pUU Ts TE /3ovX] ?)s Ka' [roD8&7]-
[,UOV KaUt 7Tat'&V KacL yvvalKOVl) KaL Tv 0 V Kat TV,u4aXcO] V- E37E L[8- 8E]
[o0 1TpVTaWEV9 ra" TE Ovca-a EO'OvcrL avTa6ra'ag dra Ka0?KOVcra]s E [v rE]
10 [L7rpvravEtac,?-
The character of the lettering suggests a date in the middle of the second century
B.C.,33 the formula for the sacrifices a date after 165 B.C.3 For the centering of the
E8oEv-clause, see W. B. Dinsmoor, Athenian Archon
List, p. 17.
W. KENDRICK PRITCHETT
MUHLENBERG COLLEGE
Vfr,
89
88
MERITT: GREEK INSCRIPTIONS
90
PLATE XXXVIII
91~1~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~X U
93 92
- ~~~I. C.,
112,
973
94
.
95 96
PLATE XL
ss~~~~~~I G., JJ2 84
